Fink authored Circumcision: A Decision for Life, in which he outlined his arguments in favour of circumcision.

One of Fink's arguments was that circumcision could prevent HIV infection. Several authors, e.g., Weiss et al. attribute the origin of this idea to Fink[1] (Alcena, however, has stated that Fink's article was "was based on my [Alcena's] idea"[2]). Subsequent medical research has investigated the matter of circumcision and HIV. In 2000, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies in the literature on sub-Saharan African AIDS concluded that circumcision is associated with significantly reduced risk.[1] In 2007, following the completion of three randomised controlled trials, the World Health Organization stated that "The efficacy of male circumcision in reducing female to male transmission of HIV has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. [...] Male circumcision should now be recognized as an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention."[3] They cautioned, however, that "Male circumcision does not provide complete protection against HIV infection. Circumcised men can still become infected with the virus and, if HIV-positive, can infect their sexual partners."